|
EU, co-chairs can't halt Tamil Eelam goal
M.R. Narayan Swamy, Indo-Asian News Service
1 June 2006
Sri Lanka may be celebrating the European Union's ban on the Tamil Tigers and
the co-chairs' warnings to further isolate them, but none of these is likely to
halt the group's determination to achieve a Tamil Eelam state.
If the past is any guide, the European Union decision, no doubt a major blow to
the Tigers, will fail to make the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) give
up its goal of carving out an independent homeland in Sri Lanka's north and
east.
It is even doubtful if the LTTE will come running back to the negotiating table
in Geneva.
The statement of the co-chairs to the peace process, highlighting publicly the
international community's frustration over Colombo's failure to provide a system
of governance that takes care of the rights of minorities, is just one reason
why the LTTE will remain wedded to its cause. But it is not the only one.
Historically, the LTTE, with its strong cult of martyrdom and devotion to its
leader Velupillai Prabhakaran, has never danced to the tunes of outside forces
even while giving such a picture, at times, for tactical reasons.
'The LTTE,' Prabhakaran had once triumphantly declared, 'will never allow a
foreign force to intervene and dominate our people.' The statement, made years
ago, remains true even today and is applicable to all countries, be it India,
Norway, Japan or the US.
Unlike Colombo, which often seemingly behaves in a confused manner, the LTTE, by
virtue of being a highly centralised and militarised force, constantly does
deeper analyses of events that affect its existence and future growth.
As months went by, it would have been clear to the LTTE that the
Norway-sponsored peace process was aimed at arresting its goal of breaking up
Sri Lanka. In other words, it is the LTTE that would be expected to give up its
bottom line, not Colombo.
This itself is an asymmetry the Tigers would find it difficult to swallow. But
they went along with the peace process as long as it helped them gain strength
and recognition they crave for.
However, the peace process could not prevent the Tigers from striking at the
enemy when they wanted, irrespective of the cost they knew they would have to
pay.Much of the outside world's simplistic understanding of the LTTE made them
believe that the Tigers would not risk another war, notwithstanding the many
threatening statements in recent times from their senior leaders.The April 25
suicide bomb attack on the Sri Lankan army chief in Colombo shattered that
wishful thinking. The general miraculously survived.Had he died, Sri Lanka could
have unleashed a war, and the Tigers would have gone into it without battling an
eyelid.
Helping the LTTE to remain on the Tamil Eelam track is Colombo's seeming
inability to come up with a credible devolution package that could greatly
diminish the appeal of a group that runs today, with undisguised pride, a de
facto Tamil Eelam state in Sri Lanka's northeast. But as Prabhakaran stated in
his November 2005 speech, the gulf between the Tigers and Colombo is very wide.
It is now unlikely to be bridged.
The situation in Sri Lanka poses an enormous challenge for India. Having
outlawed the LTTE, a good 14 years before the European Union, it has no leverage
over the group and cannot even try to influence it. In any case, the Tigers are
not going to listen to New Delhi.But India has a certain clout in Colombo and it
can make it clear to Sri Lankan leaders - forthrightly and without mincing words
- that the only alternative to anarchy in the island is a genuine devolution of
power to the Tamil and Muslim minorities.
If the decisions by India, the US and Britain to dub the LTTE a terror group did
not force it to give up its ways, the European Union is not going to succeed
with its ban.Years ago, when he was based in India, Prabhakaran was asked what
he would do if India stopped supporting the Tamils.His reply was revealing:
'India's sympathy is a morale booster, but should India
withdraw support it would not mean the end of our liberation struggle. After
all we did not start our liberation movement with India's support or with
the help of some other external forces. We will fight till we die. When I
die, someone else will take over... If my generation dies without attaining
freedom, the next generation will carry on the struggle.'
Polemics? May be, and may be not.
|
